2 more states ban gay marriage

[Tr0n]

Awwwww <3

Now go fix me dinner bitch.

 

[seinfeldrules]

Ya, I know. It's just you said, "they" voted for the president and I just wanted to point out that the ratio of people for and against gay marriage is not the same as the ratio of people for and against Bush.

Agreed (obviously). This pretty much throws out the window that Bush was elected in all the states soley for social issues. If that were the case, he would have won in a landslide judging by the numbers I saw.

Like I said above, I don't care if someone disagrees with me. I only have a problem when they use law to try to force their opinions on others. So that might be why many people are having a very strong reaction to this. It's gone far beyond just disagreeing about moral values.

They arent forcing gays to break up or change their way of life. They are just keeping them away from the word marriage. That doesnt compare at all to blacks in the 60s. They were denied the same basic rights as whites; schools, restrooms, restaurants, bus seats, etc. etc. Gays receive all those rights currently, and are only cheated on taxing. As you said

"legal marriage is not a religious institution. Non religious people can marry just as easily as religious people. This is te issue, legal marriage not religious marriage."

The government has the right to define marriage, in this case, however they see fit. This case would be more like going before a judge and calling for him to change the name of the dealth penalty to the homicide penalty for one person and the rape penalty for another. I really dont see the comparision to civil rights if gays are, or would, receive the same exact rights and privledges. Hell, as mentioned, they could make their own religion and call it marriage if they wanted, it would just not be legally recognized as traditional marriage.

Ya, the president extends his hand to gays while he also sneaks up behind them and clubs them over the head.

It's all nice and noble for Bush to say he's ok with civil unions, but when he trys to get a constitutional amendment against gay marriage passed at the same time it is mostly meaningless I think. The problem is that if people accepted Bush's "offer" and gave in to it then it would be that much easier for the ban to pass. Once a federal amendment like that pased it would be incredibly difficult to ever overturn it. Beyond even the issue at hand, I highly disagree with using the constitution as a social discrimination tool. That is not what it was designed for and anything that would help that ban pass, such as giving in to Bush's "extended hand", I am against. If that ban is defeated and completely out of the picture then I might consider compromising. But as long as that ban is hanging over our heads I see no room for compromise.

That Ammendment is going nowhere fast. It will never get passed in the needed amount of states even if it did get past Congress.

 

[Lil' Timmy]

Awwwww <3

Now go fix me dinner bitch.

;(
i'm leaving you!

 

[Locust]

Gays are forcing their beliefs on us, not the other way around. They started it.

 

[Tr0n]

Yea yea....you will come back crawling to me.

 

[Lil' Timmy]

i always do ;(

 

[Neutrino]

That Ammendment is going nowhere fast. It will never get passed in the needed amount of states even if it did get past Congress.

I've got to run so I don't have time to write any real response, but I agree that it most likely won't be passed. However, I will be far happier and much more inclinded to compromise when it is permanently gone. People say gay rights supporters are dividing the nation by wanting gay marriage. But I say that President Bush is influencing that division far more by pushing for that amendment. I think it makes a lot of people nervous and defensive, and is really hurting any chance of the compromise you speak of.

Gays are forcing their beliefs on us, not the other way around. They started it.

How? How are you personally affected by gay marriage?

Gays only want the same right to get married, which affects no one but themselves. Other people want to stop them from having that right. So how are gays forcing their beliefs on others? They are only fighting for a right that affects themselves, no one else. But on the other side people are trying to turn their moral values into laws which will only affect gays, not themselves.

Anyway, really got to run now.

 

[Bad^Hat]

Here's another quote, for those that thought themselves clever to play the 'freedom of speech' card.

The test of a persons' belief in free speech is only measured by their willingness to support that which they most detest.

 

[Locust]

I've got to run so I don't have time to write any real response, but I agree that it most likely won't be passed. However, I will be far happier and much more inclinded to compromise when it is permanently gone. People say gay rights supporters are dividing the nation by wanting gay marriage. But I say that President Bush is influencing that division far more by pushing for that amendment. I think it makes a lot of people nervous and defensive, and is really hurting any chance of the compromise you speak of.



How? How are you personally affected by gay marriage?

Gays only want the same right to get married, which affects no one but themselves. Other people want to stop them from having that right. So how are gays forcing their beliefs on others? They are only fighting for a right that affects themselves, no one else. But on the other side people are trying to turn their moral values into laws which will only affect gays, not themselves.

Anyway, really got to run now.

So isn't fighting Gay Marriage just as justified as condoning it?

 

[CptStern]

So isn't fighting Gay Marriage just as justified as condoning it?

no it isnt

 

[burnzie]

Personaly I beleive marrage is a traditional thing, between a man and a woman, its how its always been, since the days of the bible.

im not saying im religious or anything, but thats the foundry of marrage, and we cant go changing things to suit somthing that isnt normal. *gasp* big word i know, dont take it as i hate gays or anything, but if you think about it, its not normal. i have nothing against it, its your personal choice, but dont try and take somthing that shouldnt be yours anything, if you wanna be different then come up with your own thing.

Im sorry to offend anyone, but there my belifes.

 

[Neutrino]

So isn't fighting Gay Marriage just as justified as condoning it?

How? Now of course every one has an equal right to agree or disagree, but that does not mean mean they are justified in taking action on it. Of course many people think they are indeed justified in fighting it just as I think I'm justified in supporting it. But in order to be justified in actually taking action against it you must have valid, logical, and non secular reasons for doing so. I have never seen such a reason, so no I don't see how it is justified.

To put it another way, everyone is fully justified to disagree with the opinions of another person. But they are not justified if they try to take away the rights of that other person to have that opinion. Then it has gone to far.

For this issuse you have gays on one side ant people who are against them on the other side. Both sides disagree over homosexuality. That is fine and within everyone's rights. But the one side wants to force their opinion on the actions of the other side. That is different. The whole idea of banning gay marriage violates the first amendment of the constitution. So fighting against gay marriage is no more justified than fighting against free speech, or freedom of the press, or especially freedom of religion.

Personaly I beleive marrage is a traditional thing, between a man and a woman, its how its always been, since the days of the bible.

Not quite true.

http://www.infopt.demon.co.uk/marriage.htm

im not saying im religious or anything, but thats the foundry of marrage, and we cant go changing things to suit somthing that isnt normal. *gasp* big word i know, dont take it as i hate gays or anything, but if you think about it, its not normal.

It's not normal? How is it not normal? What is normal? How do you define normal? Should we start creating different laws for everyone who does't fit the "norm"? And who's idea of the "norm" should we use to base these laws on? A genius isn't "normal". Should we ban a genius from reading books so that he doesn't use his "abnormal" intelligence? How about a person born with a below average IQ? They're not normal either. Shall we pass laws pertaining to them as well? Or for one final example what about women? It was once normal for them to be married off by their fathers, restricted from having a job beyond house and child care, refused the right to vote, and in general discriminated against. All this was once normal in our society and the women of today would be considered not normal. So how does normalacy play any role in this issue?

Or you might argue that it's not normal because it's unnatural somehow. That's not true though.

First off, what is natural? Pretty much anything that happens. We are all a part of nature. Technically you cannot actually do something that is "unnatural."

Second, homosexual behavior is found all throughout the animal kingdom as well as in humans. Furthermore, there seem to be genetic causes for it. Throughout history there have been gay relationships in every society and a consistent portion of the population is gay. So it is indeed quite natural.

Gays i have nothing against it, its your personal choice, but dont try and take somthing that shouldnt be yours anything, if you wanna be different then come up with your own thing.

What are they trying to take from you? They aren't taking marriage from you. A gay couple marrying does not affect you or anyone else in the slightest. They want to expand the meaning of marriage, not take it away from anyone else.

Also, you said they should not take somehing that isn't theirs. I'm assuming you mean the institution of marriage. I agree it isn't theirs. But who's is it? Yours? Do you own marriage? Mine? Do I? Do christians own marriage? Do atheists own marriage? Does Bob down at the tavern own marriage? No. So how exactly are they taking something from someone? Nobody owns marriage, it is something for everyone. Nobody can take it.

Now if they were trying to deny you or others the right to marriage as it is denied to them then they would indeed by trying to take it. But they are not. Gay marriage would not affect the rights of anyone else. If it was legal you can still be against it. Religions can still not support it and do not have to practice it. The only people it affects are the gay couples who wish to get married. That's it.

Im sorry to offend anyone, but there my belifes.

Nope, no offense and I'm fine with you thinking that. But I hope people can eventually come to see that making it illlegal is wrong even if you disagree with it. I disagree with a lot of things people say, but I won't try to interfere with their right to say it. It's the same thing in principle. You have every right to disagree with gay marriage, but I do not think you have the right to legally ban it.

 

[Foxtrot]

Hehe, I like how they pointed out Rome has gay marriages. Rome is a good example of the downfall of an empire due to the loss of morals.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

I can't understand this.

Someone said gays are being selfish because they want marriages too, while simultaneously saying that marriage can belong only to christians under penalty of law.

I'm seeing people say that they are defending morality by punishing a minority who has harmed no-one.

I'm seeing a minority being called unnatural and abnormal by people who consistently fail to define what makes one thing more natural than another, and how even being outside the status quo is equivalent to being wrong.

And similar people who would make personal opinion and religious belief into law apparently make up over 60% of the US's population.

How can this possibly be, in the year 2004? It's not 1400 anymore, but we are still afraid of falling off the edge of the ocean.
It's saddening that common sense is still an oxymoron, even after all these years.

Hehe, I like how they pointed out Rome has gay marriages. Rome is a good example of the downfall of an empire due to the loss of morals.

Actually, Rome essentially fell as a direct result of christians showing up. I'd like to see a single credible historian credit gays with Rome's downfall.
I bet you'd like to see that too. Too bad it's not going to happen.
"When you assume, you make an ass out of yourself."

 

[Foxtrot]

I can't understand this.

Someone said gays are being selfish because they want marriages too, while simultaneously saying that marriage can belong only to christians under penalty of law.

I'm seeing people say that they are defending morality by punishing a minority who has harmed no-one.

I'm seeing a minority being called unnatural and abnormal by people who consistently fail to define what makes one thing more natural than another, and how even being outside the status quo is equivalent to being wrong.

And similar people who would make personal opinion and religious belief into law apparently make up over 60% of the US's population.

How can this possibly be, in the year 2004? It's not 1400 anymore, but we are still afraid of falling off the edge of the ocean.
It's saddening that common sense is still an oxymoron, even after all these years.



Actually, Rome essentially fell as a direct result of christians showing up. I'd like to see a single credible historian credit gays with Rome's downfall.
I bet you'd like to see that too. Too bad it's not going to happen.
"When you assume, you make an ass out of yourself."

I didn't say gays, just the lack of morals. The Roman government officials started getting a little weird towards the end.

 

[Yakuza]

If we allow gay marriage, we encourage a practice that has no real point but selfish indulgince.

While your at it, put a ban on divorce. That seems to be causing way more problems in america than homosexual marriages.

And I half to say most hetrosexual marriages are based on selfish indulginces. Most people are fundemtaly with some one because of what that person can offer them. He/She will make me happy, He/She will makes us money...ect.

And if its wrong to have selfish indulgences...that means short shower times for you bucko..hehe

 

[CptStern]

you genuinely surprise me sometimes, yakuza ...in a good way

 

[Foxtrot]

While your at it, put a ban on divorce. That seems to be causing way more problems in america than homosexual marriages.

And I half to say most hetrosexual marriages are based on selfish indulginces. Most people are fundemtaly with some one because of what that person can offer them. He/She will make me happy, He/She will makes us money...ect.

And if its wrong to have selfish indulgences...that means short shower times for you bucko..hehe

Banning divorce wouldn't solve the problem, but making it harder to get married would.

 

[bliink]

I always say that I don't discriminate, and that I wont judge someone based on what they believe, or practice (within reason of course), and with the case of homosexualiy, and gay marriage, I would never hold a prejudice or grudge against it.

As long as your actions do not forcefully infringe the liberties and freedoms of others, I have no right to stop it. No one has a right to, its one of the most basic parts of human rights, and the 'democracies' you all happy ascribe to but seem not to understand.

 

[Lil' Timmy]

keep your "democracies" offa me! :frown:

 

[qckbeam]

I want to give you all a makeover!!!

 

[Steve]

I want to give you all a makeover!!!

oooh! oooh! do me! do me!

 

[Neutrino]

Ooh, makeover party! Count me in.

As long as your actions do not forcefully infringe the liberties and freedoms of others, I have no right to stop it. No one has a right to, its one of the most basic parts of human rights, and the 'democracies' you all happy ascribe to but seem not to understand.

Nicely said.

 

[Yakuza]

Banning divorce wouldn't solve the problem, but making it harder to get married would.

Holy crap..what problems are we talking about. Sorry I might have missed somthing.

My point was, if were going to start taking away the right for people to choose what they want to do as far as relationships go, why not start with putting a ban on that wich is more distructive for a society.

I am sure I dont have all the facts, but from what I have read. Children are more likely to do worse in school, and are several times more likely to become criminals than kids who have 2 parents.

Its also kind of interesting to think about how us religious people take homosexuality. You know the bible has A LOT MORE TO SAY about "adultry" than homosexuality. And from some of teh statistics I have read, some of the highest percentages of divorces, including those dealing with adultry are with in the church. Yet I dont see any picket lines in front of the court house. For a group of people who fight so radicaly to define what a marriage means, dont do much to protect the covenent in which they "charish" so dearly.

 

[blahblahblah]

Holy crap..what problems are we talking about. Sorry I might have missed somthing.

My point was, if were going to start taking away the right for people to choose what they want to do as far as relationships go, why not start with putting a ban on that wich is more distructive for a society.

I am sure I dont have all the facts, but from what I have read. Children are more likely to do worse in school, and are several times more likely to become criminals than kids who have 2 parents.

Its also kind of interesting to think about how us religious people take homosexuality. You know the bible has A LOT MORE TO SAY about "adultry" than homosexuality. And from some of teh statistics I have read, some of the highest percentages of divorces, including those dealing with adultry are with in the church. Yet I dont see any picket lines in front of the court house. For a group of people who fight so radicaly to define what a marriage means, dont do much to protect the covenent in which they "charish" so dearly.

I agree with you 100%. A sin is a sin is a sin.

 

[seinfeldrules]

Makeover party? Thats it?

How about, in the spirit of the thread, makeout party!!! HUrrahhH!!!

 

[Yakuza]

Makeover party? Thats it?

How about, in the spirit of the thread, makeout party!!! HUrrahhH!!!

I was allways confused by the term "makeout". I mean when I wanted a girl, I allways tried to "make-in", if you catch my drift.

 

[Lil' Timmy]

I was allways confused by the term "makeout". I mean when I wanted a girl, I allways tried to "make-in", if you catch my drift.

it's reverse psychology for t3h ladies.